[Sugar-devel] [DESIGN] Proposal: Multi-Selection and Batch Operations on Journal entries
Ajay Garg
ajay at activitycentral.com
Mon Aug 6 05:43:27 EDT 2012
Hi Gary.
Finally... the checkbox-issue has been solved :)
Please find the "fixed" rpm, containing the checkbox-fix at
http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select-with-checkbox-fix/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
For brevity, here is the patch link ::
http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/381e706de7e7309d27a44ed064794a44d50aad4a
The sugar-toolkit rpm remains the same as before.
So, in addition to the "a) - i)" points of the previous mail, I add the
next point ::
j)
Now there is prompt feedback of checking/unchecking the checkboxes and
favorite-icons.
However, note that for favorite-icons, there is a logical hinderance to
true prompt feedback, as described in http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/3147.
Checkboxes' feedbacks work perfectly !!
Thanks and Regards,
Ajay
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> Hi Gary.
>
> Please find attached the links to the "fixed" rpms.
> Please "--upgrade --force --nodeps" on the dx3ng143 image, on which you
> have been testing.
>
>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select/sugar-toolkit-0.94.0-20120805.dx3.fc14.i386.rpm
>
>
> For brevity, the patches are at ::
>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/38a261887ed44756147bae44277642252cae628f
>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/0c71cf00dfb8fe507627109748b5539e0eeba87f
>
>
>
> Following are the changes/fixes ::
> All courtesy you :)
>
>
>
>
> a)
> 'Select none' renamed as 'Deselect all'.
>
>
>
> b)
> Now, a text-widget has been added to the top of EditToolBar.
> This serves the following two purposes ::
>
>
> * The widget is supposed to display only one line, at ANY time.
>
> * Usually, while in "multi-select" mode, it will display "<x> of 97
> selected", where "x" is the number of entries currently selected,
> and 97 is assumed to be the total number of entries.
>
>
> Here, as we select/deselect by single-click, or "select
> all"/"deselect all" button, the update happens consequently.
>
> So, as is obvious, this modification helps show the number of
> selected entries, even when entries are selected/deselected one at a time
> (previously, the status was shown, only when "select all" or
> "deselect all" was done).
>
> * During batch-copy, or batch-erase, this widget shows the running
> status of the entry currently being processed.
>
>
>
> c)
> Due to b), the progress-statuses are now NOT shown as alerts; rather as
> texts in the text-widget.
>
>
>
> d)
> However, any errors (such as "Entries without a file cannot be copied")
> are continued to be shown as alerts.
>
>
>
> e)
> Other than the progress-texts, and error-alerts, the only other
> notification shown are the confirmation-alerts before beginning
> with the "Batch-Copy" and "Batch-Erase".
>
>
>
> f)
> During Batch-Operations (almost exclusively Batch-Copy), if an error
> occurs, users are presented with two options ::
>
> * "Stop" - This stops the batch-operation there and then.
>
> * "Continue" - Proceed forward with the next journal entry.
>
>
>
> g)
> As seen in f), the "Ok" of the error-alert has been replaced (only
> textually) by "Continue".
>
>
>
> h)
> There were exceptions of the form "KeyError: 'keep'" occuring in logs.
> This was due to some cases, wherein "keep" property was not present in a
> particular journal entry.
>
> So now, as a fix, we first check if "keep" is a valid metadata-key. If
> yes, we read its value to gauge favorite-status.
> Else, we assume that the journal-entry is an unfavorite by default.
>
>
>
> i)
> VERY IMPORTANT NOTE ::
>
> Renaming a journal-entry (by clicking and modifying the contents of the
> title-cell, has been disabled functionally.
> This is because, the following happens when a rename is done in the
> "Documents" view ::
>
> * Initially, the UID is same as the path of the entry in "Documents".
>
> * User changes the name. The change is written on the DS, and the UID
> changed.
>
> * Now, since refresh is inhibited in multi-select view, we need to
> fetch the new value of the title from the DS.
> This requires the UID, through which the UID could be fetched. Since
> the name of the "Documents" journal-entry has
> changed, so has its UID. But in the memory, the old UID still
> resides. Fetching the "new" title from the "old" UID does not
> work.
>
> Now, I tried disabling the renaming while rendering the listview,
> but that could not be done, as rendering th listview requires
> knowing whether we are in multi-select mode, while multi-select mode
> is set, after the listview is rendered. So, we are in a catch-22
> situation.
>
> So, the way it works now in multi-select mode ::
>
> * User is apparently able to edit the title, but that is all what
> happens.
> There is no efective change - neither in backend, nor in frontend.
>
> In the normal view, the renaming works as usual.
>
>
> ======================================================
>
>
> PENDING CHANGES ::
>
> a)
> As explained in point i) above, the renaming will not work, while in
> multi-select mode (however, the bug you reported wherein trying to rename in
> "Documents" folder renders the UI unusable, has been duly fixed (of
> course, by not allowing the renaming to happen).
>
> If this is indeed required, this will be a major change in the way we deal
> with UIDs for non-journal mount-points. But given that renaming is affected
> only in multi-select mode (renaming does not work at all in multi-select;
> while it works as usual in normal-mode), I am a bit sceptical to regarding
> this.
>
>
>
> b)
> A solution to the following bug ::
>
>
> *UNRESOLVED BUG. Tick-box slow/erratic behaviour in dx3ng143 with latest
> rpm fixes image on XO1, still needs mouse movement to redraw. This is also
> an issue when using the "Select all" toobar button, as the list view
> tick-boxes do not update until after the "Select all. You have selected N
> entries. (Ok)" dialogue is clicked.*
>
> still eludes me :(
>
> This is an important issue, since (although there is no unusable UX, or
> any such major workflow blocker), the select/deselect "visual" "feedback"
> is an important thing, that should be conveyed as soon as possible. Though
> Gary's feedback on adding a text-widget on the top EditToolBar, does help
> show the number of entries selected, and thus gives a "textual" "feedback"
> :)
>
> I would request all sugar-devel members to please post a solution to the
> issue, for which the discussion is going on, in the thread ::
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2012-July/038626.html
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Ajay
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Gary Martin <garycmartin at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Ajay,
>>
>>
>> On 4 Aug 2012, at 10:21, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks a ton Gary.
>>> This is REALLY useful :)
>>>
>>
>> Fab :)
>>
>> Please find the comments inline.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Gary Martin <garycmartin at googlemail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Ajay/Anish,
>>>>
>>>> On 18 Jul 2012, at 11:57, Anish Mangal <anish at activitycentral.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I would like to propose the long-discussed-finally-implemented ;-)
>>>> > journal entry batch operation and multi selection feature for
>>>> > inclusion in sugar-0.98. All the necessary and relevant details should
>>>> > be present in the associated feature page:
>>>> >
>>>> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots
>>>> >
>>>> > AFAIK, This feature was initially brought up in discussions in EDUJam
>>>> > in 2011 and an initial implementation was made by Martin Abente. The
>>>> > current implementation, done by Ajay, has been derived from that
>>>> > keeping the UI experience largely the same while significantly
>>>> > speeding up operations like select/deselect.
>>>> >
>>>> > Should you have any design related questions about this, feel free to
>>>> > reply to this thread.
>>>>
>>>> At last Tuesday's design meeting we didn't make it back around to this
>>>> agenda item, so here's my feedback/notes after testing the DX3 image with
>>>> the new rpms:
>>>>
>>>> - FIXED. Once in multi-select mode, the favourite stars no longer
>>>> visibly updates, though changes update later once multi-select mode is
>>>> exited.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great !!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - FIXED. Auto deselection after batch operation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great !!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - UNRESOLVED BUG. Tick-box slow/erratic behaviour in dx3ng143 with
>>>> latest rpm fixes image on XO1, still needs mouse movement to redraw. This
>>>> is also an issue when using the "Select all" toobar button, as the list
>>>> view tick-boxes do not update until after the "Select all. You have
>>>> selected N entries. (Ok)" dialogue is clicked.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep.. this is becoming a real pain.
>>> I have tried the solutions listed at
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2012-July/038626.html,
>>> but none seem to work :-\
>>> Anyways, I am still trying ..
>>>
>>> [Ajay ACTION 1] : Fix this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - NEW BUG. Renaming an entry while in multi-select mode does not
>>>> display the name change, only updates the name displayed after multi-select
>>>> mode is exited.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks. Reproduced the bug at my side.
>>>
>>> [Ajay ACTION 2] : Will fix.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - NEW BUG. If you rename while in multi-select and then try to copy,
>>>> the entry can't be copied and raises an error "Entries without a filename
>>>> cannot be copied."
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm.. I think this is a false-negative.
>>> I tried the following ::
>>>
>>> * Entered "multi-select" mode.
>>>
>>> * Selected an entry (by ticking the check-box).
>>>
>>> * Re-named the entry (however, the rename was not
>>> immediately visible, due to the above bug).
>>>
>>> * Copied the entry to "Documents".
>>>
>>> * Exited "multi-select" mode.
>>>
>>> * Clicked "Documents" icon.
>>>
>>> * The entry (WITH THE MODIFIED NAME) was present.
>>>
>>> I guess the error message "Entries without a file cannot be copied"
>>> occurred on an entry, that would have anyways given this message, even if
>>> you hadn't renamed the entry.
>>>
>>> [Gary ACTION 1] : Please let me know if you still face the error :)
>>>
>>
>> OK, sorry I must have missed an extra step (I can't reproduce this just
>> now). Will email you if I can find a reliable way to reproduce it.
>>
>> However, I seem to have found a more nasty bug, while trying to test...
>> Switch to the Journal Documents view; select an item; rename the selected
>> item; the selected item will be deselected – though you'll still be in
>> multi-select mode (but with nothing selected); click the toolbar button
>> Select none; Journal will now be in a bad/unusable state, spinning busy
>> cursor, can't escape multi select mode, shell log shows tracebacks IOError:
>> Couldn't open metadata directory. I needed to restart Sugar to get back to
>> normal. I'll post some shell logs in a separate email to you.
>>
>> - UNRESOLVED DESIGN QUESTION. Should filters continue to work once in
>>>> multi-select mode e.g: Filter for star favourite items in Journal; multi
>>>> select all stared items; un-favourite some entries while in multi-select
>>>> mode. Should they be removed from the multi-select view, or stay? Currently
>>>> they stay, but this causes a visual 'jump' when exiting multi-select mode
>>>> as the initial filter is re-applied to the view. Same issue if filtering
>>>> the Journal by title, and you rename some entries while in multi-select
>>>> mode.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, I would say not to effect the change during multi-select mode,
>>> because of the following reasons ::
>>>
>>> * Currently, the code is tightly bound to having the
>>> "current" listmodel entries in the cache.
>>> A re-fresh, would cause the cached entries to be
>>> re-distributed, requiring a very major code change.
>>>
>>> * The original motive of "allowing" the user to set/unset
>>> favorite status, and rename entry, is to help the user do the processing on
>>> the entry,
>>> as she selects the entry. So, I guess it would be ok to
>>> effect the filters of these "secondary" features, AFTER the original action
>>> (copy,
>>> erase) is completed, and "multi-select" mode exited.
>>>
>>> [Gary ACTION 2] : Anyhow, please let me know if you think otherwise :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - FEEDBACK. In multi-select mode the toolbar button string 'Select
>>>> none' would be better renamed as 'Deselect all'.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>> [Ajay ACTION 3] : Will fix.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - TESTING. A loaded Journal with ~100 items, and a USB stick with 900+
>>>> items was tested. Selecting individual items one by one is reasonable
>>>> (ignoring the above unresolved redraw/event bug). Batch selecting,
>>>> deselecting, erasing operations are pretty quick (batch feedback progress
>>>> is helpful especially for the 900+ item case). Batch copying is the slowest
>>>> operation (as to be expected), feedback progress here is essential for even
>>>> a few items.
>>>>
>>>
>>> [Gary ACTION 3] : Ok, so we show the progress for all = "Select",
>>> "Deselect", "Copy", "Erase", right?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but in the primary title bar as a text widget.
>>
>> - FEEDBACK. In the primary multi-select toolbar, add a separator and
>>>> text widget to show how many items are selected, and how many are in the
>>>> current multi-select view e.g. "Selected 3 of 123" so the current
>>>> multi-select state is always visible to the user. This same widget can be
>>>> used for progress feedback during batch operations e.g. "Copying 9 of 22:
>>>> <title>", "Erasing 3 of 15: <title>", "Deselecting 5 of 17". This removes
>>>> the need for all progress alerts during batch operations, see below.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gary, please clarify a bit more.
>>> For eg, if a user wishes to do batch-copy on 15 entries (out of 97
>>> entries), so would the snapshots be like ::
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 1 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 2 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 3 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 4 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 14 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
>>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 15 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> OR WOULD IT BE SIMPLY
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 1 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 2 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 3 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 4 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>> ..
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 14 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> <First row of text widget> Copying 15 of 15 <title>
>>>
>>>
>>> [Gary ACTION 4] : Please clarify.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I think I understood what is required.
>>
>> * The widget is supposed to display only one line, at ANY time.
>>
>> * Usually, while in "multi-select" mode, it will display "<x> of 97
>> selected", where "x" is the number of entries currently selected.
>> Here, as we select/deselect by single-click, or "select all" /
>> "deselect all" button, the update happens consequently.
>>
>> So, as is obvious, this modification helps show the number of selected
>> entries, even when entries are selected/deselected one at a time
>> (previously, the status was shown, only when "select all" or "deselect
>> all" was done).
>>
>> * During batch-copy, or batch-erase, this widget shows the running status
>> of the entry currently being processed.
>>
>> * This seems to be a sleeker design, as it does do away with showing the
>> running status as an alert.
>> After all, alerts are meant to convey a potentially major action ..
>>
>>
>> So, modified action for Gary :D ::
>> [Gary ACTION 4] : Please confirm, as to if my understanding is
>> correct.
>>
>>
>> Yes, that's it! :)
>>
>> Regards,
>> --Gary
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>>
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> Ajay
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - FEEDBACK. {confirmation_before, progress, confirmation_after}
>>>> ... select_none {N, N, N}
>>>> ... select_all {N, N, N}
>>>> ... erase {Y, N, N}
>>>> ... copying {Y, N, N}
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok. Got it :)
>>>
>>> [Ajay ACTION 4] : Will make the changes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - FEEDBACK. We should allow a user to abort a batch operation when an
>>>> error occurs. Use cases, encountering many errors during a batch operation
>>>> when a volume runs out of space, or becomes unavailable. One solution on
>>>> other platforms is a check box for in the error dialogues "[√] Apply to
>>>> all" (to ignore future errors of this type during this batch process),
>>>> and/or an additional button "Stop". I'd suggest our batch operation errors
>>>> dialogues add a "Stop" button to allow aborting the batch process, and that
>>>> the current "Ok" button is renamed "Continue" to be more clear.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>> So,
>>> * [Ajay ACTION 5] : We add a "Stop" button, which
>>> occurs on any error alert message.
>>> If the user clicks the "Stop" button, the
>>> batch-operations ends there ans then.
>>>
>>> * [Ajay ACTION 6] : "Ok" button will be renamed to
>>> "Continue" button.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - UNRESOLVED DESIGN QUESTION. Do we want to allow a user to abort a
>>>> batch operation while it is in progress? Use case, copying/erasing many
>>>> items over a slow network, or usb device, and deciding if it is not worth
>>>> the wait. I think, for now, we can avoid this extra UI work as the batch
>>>> features do provide the option to cancel before they begin. We should
>>>> revisit this if it turns out to be a frustration for users. The UI design
>>>> would likely be to add the cancel icon (X) to the primary toolbar while a
>>>> batch operation is in progress.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1.
>>> Anish too had suggested the same, but then we forfeited the idea, as
>>> this would make this (unnecessarily?) complex.
>>>
>>> Anyways, in-field experiences are the real teachers :D :D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> --Gary
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gary, waiting for your responses :)
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>> Ajay
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20120806/40fc757b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Sugar-devel
mailing list